DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/07/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5, 10, 12-15, 20-22 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Office Action mailed on 01/07/2026.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“polishing apparatus” in claim 1, interpreted as any polishing tool as described in paragraph [29] of the original disclosure “ The polishing method may be, for example, CMP (Chemical Mechanical Polishing)”, and equivalents thereof.
“radiation unit” in claim 1, interpreted as scanner as described in paragraph [42] of the original disclosure “The radiation unit 220 may include, for example, a galvano scanner 221” , and equivalents thereof.
“rotation driving unit” in claim 1, interpreted as motor as described in paragraph[47] of the original disclosure “The rotation driving unit 240 includes, for example, a rotation motor”, and equivalents thereof.
“debris removing apparatus” in claim 10, interpreted as any cleaning apparatus as described in paragraph [71] of the original disclosure “the debris removing apparatus 51 is configured as a cleaning apparatus”, and equivalents thereof.
“transfer device” in claim 10, interpreted as holder as described in paragraph[25] of the original disclosure “The transfer device 24 is equipped with a holding mechanism configured to hold the substrates 100”, and equivalents thereof.
“cleaning apparatus” in claim 12, interpreted as a water supply as described in paragraph [71] of the original disclosure “a cleaning apparatus in which the water-soluble protective layer 140 is dissolved in water to be removed”, and equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al., CN 208256622U (hereafter Su) , and further in view of Nie et al., US 20200078884 (hereafter Nie), and Small et al., US 11579440 (hereafter Small).
Regarding claim 1,
“A substrate processing system, comprising:” (Su teaches wafer planarization processing device in title.)
“a laser processing apparatus including a holder” (Machine translated Fig. 1 of Su teaches wafer holding and handling integrated device 2.)
PNG
media_image1.png
907
1173
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Su teaches laser chemical wafer planarization device
“ and a radiation unit,” (Fig. 1 teaches laser and control device 7. Page 3, paragraph 5 of the attached machine translation teaches “the said laser and control device comprises a laser light source, a power supply, a beam guiding device, scanner, mirror, lens and laser multi-wavelength output, the laser pulse wave output, pulse wave driver, laser resonance, laser channel data receiver”. Here scanner corresponds to radiation unit in the instant claim.)
“the holder being configured to hold a substrate” (Machine translated Fig. 1 of Su teaches wafer holding and handling integrated device 2.)
“ including a base substrate, an irregularity pattern formed on a main surface of the base substrate, and an irregularity layer formed along the irregularity pattern,” (This limitation is directed to a material or article worked upon by the substrate processing system. The material or article work on is base substrate with irregularity layer and protrusion. MPEP 2115 teaches “The courts have held that "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935), In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).”)
“the radiation unit being configured to radiate a laser beam” (Page 3, paragraph 5 of the attached machine translation teaches “the said laser and control device comprises a laser light source, a power supply, a beam guiding device, scanner, mirror, lens and laser multi-wavelength output, the laser pulse wave output, pulse wave driver, laser resonance, laser channel data receiver”.)
“ to a protrusion of the irregularity layer to flatten the irregularity layer by removing the protrusion in a state that the substrate is held by the holder;” (This limitation is directed to a material or article worked upon by the substrate processing system. The material or article work on is base substrate with irregularity layer and protrusion. MPEP 2115 teaches “The courts have held that "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935), In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).”)
“a controller configured to control a position of an irradiation point of the laser beam;” (Page 3, paragraph 5 of the attached machine translation teaches “the said laser and control device comprises a laser light source, a power supply, a beam guiding device, scanner, mirror, lens and laser multi-wavelength output, the laser pulse wave output, pulse wave driver, laser resonance, laser channel data receiver”.)
“a polishing apparatus configured to polish” ( Please see claim interpretation. Translated Fig. 1 teaches chemical injection device 4. Page 3, paragraph 2 teaches that device 4 supplies material to polish the substrate “the chemical injection device of the utility model connecting wafer fixing integrated with operating device giving the wafer surface for chemical injection, the chemical injection device comprises a chemical supply tank, injecting emitter, and a flow control device such as system, chemical can be an acid, a base, a grinding liquid, ultra pure water or other substances of the planarization material, copper film layer process for copper polishing solution”. )
“ the irregularity layer in which the protrusion is removed with the laser beam to be flattened; ” (This limitation is directed to a material or article worked upon by the substrate processing system. The material or article work on is base substrate with irregularity layer and protrusion. MPEP 2115 teaches “The courts have held that "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935), In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).”)
“wherein the laser processing apparatus includes …..and a rotation driving unit configured to rotate the holder,” (Page 5, paragraph 14 in Su teaches that a servo electric motor rotates the wafer on the holder 2)
…..”wherein the controller rotates the holder” (Page 5, paragraph 14 in Su teaches that a servo electric motor rotates the wafer on the holder 2. Su further teaches that speed and position of holder is adjusted by control device 7 . Page 5, paragraph 14 teaches “displacement and transmission 5 comprises servo electric motor, gear and the brake displacement location, modulation rotating speed transmission to the wafer fixing revolving around the same centre of the operation device 2, can be adjusted by changing 30RPM to 120RPM rotating speed and a laser and control device 7 the mutual movement speed and position.”)
rotating the holder….by rotating the substrate(Page 5, paragraph 14 in Su teaches that a servo electric motor rotates the wafer on the holder 2. Su further teaches that speed and position of holder is adjusted by control device 7 . Page 5, paragraph 14 teaches “displacement and transmission 5 comprises servo electric motor, gear and the brake displacement location, modulation rotating speed transmission to the wafer fixing revolving around the same centre of the operation device 2, can be adjusted by changing 30RPM to 120RPM rotating speed and a laser and control device 7 the mutual movement speed and position.”)
Su is silent about “a camera configured to image the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam;”, “wherein the radiation unit of the laser processing apparatus includes a galvano scanner configured to displace the irradiation point in the irregularity layer,” “wherein the controller …based on an outline of the protrusion imaged by the camera and removes the protrusion within each area of the substrate overlapping with an area where the irradiation point of the galvano scanner is allowed to be formed, and then, switches the each area of the substrate by … the substrate,”, “wherein the galvano scanner comprises a galvano mirror and a galvano motor configured to rotate the galvano mirror so as to move the irradiation point within the area.”
Nie teaches “a camera configured to image the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam;” (Nie teaches in paragraph [28] “The optical surface profiler 140 may contain a surface profiler emitter 142 and a surface profiler receiver 144.” Here the receiver corresponds to camera.)
“wherein the radiation unit of the laser processing apparatus includes a galvano scanner configured to displace the irradiation point in the irregularity layer,” (Paragraph [25] in Nie teaches “The laser beam delivery unit 130 may contain a Galvano scanner system 132 and a focusing optical system 134. The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
“wherein the controller …. based on an outline of the protrusion imaged by the camera” (Step 202 in Fig. 2 in Nie teaches measuring topology. Paragraph [37] teaches “the controller may determine a first position to planarize. The position may be a predetermined starting block of the panel, such as the upper left hand corner. The controller may move the laser to the first of the position(s) so determined using one or both of the laser beam delivery unit and the stage.” Thus, the controller moves the stage based on the initial measurement of topology.)
PNG
media_image2.png
628
669
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 in Nie
“ and removes the protrusion within each area of the substrate overlapping with an area” (Nie teaches digitizing the surface into blocks in paragraph [34], the controller then assigns each block to a corresponding laser process in paragraph [35].)
“where the irradiation point of the galvano scanner is allowed to be formed,” (The claim is interpreted as galvano scanner scans the substrate. Paragraph [25] teaches “The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
“and then, switches the each area of the substrate by … the substrate,” (Paragraph [43] teaches “the controller may then move the laser beam to the other block using one or both of the laser beam delivery unit and the stage.”)
wherein the galvano scanner comprises a galvano mirror …configured to rotate the galvano mirror so as to move the irradiation point within the area. (Paragraph [25] in Nie teaches “The laser beam delivery unit 130 may contain a Galvano scanner system 132 and a focusing optical system 134. The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the camera, galvano scanner, and controller as taught in Nie to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “Topography of the layer is measured to produce a topographic map, which is then digitized into blocks of that indicate different thickness variation. Laser conditions are assigned for each block, a laser steered to planarization blocks where material is to be removed, and the material ablated at each planarization block. In-situ monitoring of the surface profile provides feedback to adjust the laser conditions during planarization” as taught in abstract in Nie.)
wherein the galvano scanner comprises …a galvano motor (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Small teaches “In a 2D galvo system, an X-Y scan head module including two mirrors each rotatable by a galvanometric motor is located along a laser beam path between a laser device and a work piece” in column 1, lines 30-35.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the galvano motor as taught in Small to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “The first galvanometric motor may operate to rotate its mirror to reposition the laser beam along the work piece with respect to a first axis (the X direction). The second galvanometric motor may operate to rotate its mirror to reposition the laser beam along the work piece with respect to a second orthogonal axis (the Y direction)” as taught in column 1, lines 35-40.
Regarding claim 2,
“The substrate processing system of Claim 1, wherein the irregularity layer contains silicon oxide, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, silicon carbonitride, or carbon.” (This limitation is directed to a material or article worked upon by the substrate processing system. The material or article work on is irregularity layer. MPEP 2115 teaches “The courts have held that "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935), In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).”)
Regarding claim 3,
“The substrate processing system of Claim 1, wherein the laser processing apparatus includes a displacement meter configured to measure a height of the irregularity layer before removing the protrusion with the laser beam,” (Su is silent about this limitation.
Nie teaches optical surface profiler 140 in Fig. 1. Here surface profilometer corresponds to the displacement meter in instant claim.)
“ and the controller controls an output of a light source of the laser beam based on a height of the protrusion measured by the displacement meter.”(Nie teaches a method to measure topology using a surface profilometer and sending data to controller, controller determines ablation locations based on the data, and apply laser accordingly in Fig. 2, paragraph [34, 37, 39].)
PNG
media_image3.png
525
443
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Nie teaches a laser planarization method
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the displacement meter and controller as taught in Nie to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the laser beam may be controlled to move across the area to slice the dielectric material as shown in FIGS. 4B-4D, The optical surface profiler may be used during removal for in-situ monitoring and an instantaneous feedback to the controller to confirm that the calculated amount of dielectric material has been removed and thus control removal to sub-micron resolution” as taught in paragraph [39] of Nie.)
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su, Nie, Small as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Im, US 7259081 (hereafter Im).
“The substrate processing system of Claim 1, wherein the radiation unit of the laser processing apparatus includes a homogenizer configured to uniform an intensity distribution of the laser beam;” (Primary combination of references is silent about this limitation.
The limitation “to uniform an intensity distribution of the laser beam” describes what a homogenizer does. Im teaches a beam homogenizer 144 in Fig. 1.)
“and an aperture configured to form a cross sectional shape of the laser beam into a rectangle shape.” (Im teaches mask 150 with a rectangular open region 157 in Fig. 3. Column 8, lines 45-50 teaches “the mask 150 can pattern the pulsed beam to have a shape and profile directed by the open or transparent regions of the mask 150.” Here open region 157 corresponds to the aperture.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the beam homogenizer and aperture as taught in Im to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the open or transparent section 157 allows the portion of the beam pulse 164 whose cross-section corresponds to that of the section 157 to enter the optics of the system according to the present invention, and irradiate the corresponding areas of the semiconductor thin film 175. In this manner, the mask 150 is capable of pattering the beam pulse 164 so as to impinge the semiconductor thin film 175 of the sample 170 at predetermined portions thereof” as taught in column 8, lines 55-65. Additionally, designing the cross-section of laser beam into a rectangle shape is a result effective variable to optimize the laser processing, and hence obvious. MPEP 2144.05-II teaches“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) )
Claim(s) 10, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su, Nie, Small as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fukuoka et al., WO 2017138355 (hereafter Fukuoka).
Regarding claim 10,
“The substrate processing system of Claim 1, further comprising: a debris removing apparatus configured to remove,…debris which is produced on the irregularity layer in which the protrusion is removed to be flattened;”(Su teaches a cleaning and drying device 6 in Fig. 1. Page 3, paragraph 4 teaches the wafer is cleaned after planarization in the cleaning and drying device 6 “Further, the cleaning and drying device of the utility model, the connecting wafer is fixedly integrated with the operating device, the wafer planarization processing is finished after a cleaning and drying, the cleaning and drying apparatus comprises an ultra-pure water, carbon dioxide and organic solvent supply system, and the flow and pressure control system, and clean dry hot air and nitrogen supply system, and temperature, time, air quantity control system and so on.”)
“and a transfer device configured to transfer the substrate between the laser processing apparatus, the polishing apparatus and the debris removing apparatus.”(Su teaches wafer in/out port 3 in Fig. 1. Page 3, paragraph 1 teaches “the access port can be a FOUP, FOSB, RSP, the MRSp becoming active, SMIF wafer conveying carrier interface.”
However, Su is silent about “before the substrate is carried into the polishing apparatus ….to transfer the substrate between the laser processing apparatus, the polishing apparatus and the debris removing apparatus”.
PNG
media_image4.png
493
488
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 10 of Fukuoka teaches transfer device
Fukuoka teaches in Fig. 10, and page 11, paragraph 7 “the grinding apparatus 1B according to the third embodiment includes a plurality of stages 10B1 and 10B2, and any one of the stages 10B1 and 10B2 includes the carry-in station 70, the grinding station 20, the carry-out station 80, and the cleaning station 90”. Fig. 10 further teaches stage conveyance unit 40A that transfers the wafer between stations. Thus Fukuoka is solving the same problem of transferring the substrate between different apparatuses as the instant claim.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the transfer device, and grinding station in Fukuoka to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su to transfer the wafer between laser processing apparatus, polishing apparatus, and debris removing apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the throughput of a series of processes by the grinding apparatus 1B can be further increased” as taught in page 11, paragraph 7 in Fukuoka.)
Regarding claim 12,
“The substrate processing system of Claim 10, .. and the debris removing apparatus is a cleaning apparatus configured to remove the water-soluble protective layer by dissolving the water-soluble protective layer in water.” (Please see claim interpretation.
Su teaches a cleaning and drying device 6 in Fig. 1 comprising water. Page 3, paragraph 4 teaches the wafer is cleaned after planarization in the cleaning and drying device 6 “Further, the cleaning and drying device of the utility model, the connecting wafer is fixedly integrated with the operating device, the wafer planarization processing is finished after a cleaning and drying, the cleaning and drying apparatus comprises an ultra-pure water, carbon dioxide and organic solvent supply system, and the flow and pressure control system, and clean dry hot air and nitrogen supply system, and temperature, time, air quantity control system and so on.”)
“wherein a water-soluble protective layer is formed on a surface of the irregularity layer opposite to the base substrate to protect the irregularity layer from the debris,” (This limitation is directed to a material or article worked upon by the substrate processing system. The material or article work on is base substrate with irregularity layer and water-soluble protective layer. MPEP 2115 teaches “The courts have held that "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935), In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).”)
Claim(s) 13, 14, 20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie et al., CN 106601607 (hereafter Xie) and further in view of Yoo, US 6242341 (hereafter Yoo), Nie, and Small.
Regarding claim 13,
“A substrate processing method, comprising: holding, with a holder, a substrate including a base substrate,” (Xie teaches “the one surface of the gallium nitride crystal is fixed upwards on the laser platform” on page 3, paragraph 13 of the attached machine translation. Page 4, paragraph 1 teaches “the gallium nitride crystal is single wafer”. Here GaN wafer is the substrate. It is implied that the wafer is fixed on the laser platform on a holder.)
……“flattening the irregularity layer by radiating a laser beam to a protrusion of the irregularity layer,” (Page 4, paragraph 1 teaches “using the laser irradiation from the edge to the center of each face, laser ablation depth is gradually increased from the edge to the centre…. finishing any one point thickness of gallium nitride crystal is modified by laser irradiation after not more than or less than 50% of the average thickness,” Xie teaches varying laser ablation depth selectively, this implies radiating a laser beam to protrusion of the surface.)
“controlling a position of an irradiation point of the laser beam and removing the protrusion in a state that the substrate is held by the holder;” (Page 3 teaches “S11, the one surface of the gallium nitride crystal is fixed upwards on the laser platform, using the laser to irradiate the selected region of the surface;
S12, the gallium nitride crystal is irradiated by the surface for cleaning”. It is implied that the substrate is held on the laser platform on a holder. Irradiating selected region corresponds to controlling a position of an irradiation point.)
PNG
media_image5.png
346
740
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Xie teaches a 2 step method of laser irradiation and polishing
“polishing, by a polishing apparatus, the irregularity layer in which the protrusion has been removed with the laser beam to be flattened;” (Fig. 1 teaches “S2, the gallium nitride crystal modification of irradiation under the action of chemical corrosion and mechanical grinding and then polishing and flattening the surface.”)
Xie is silent about “an irregularity pattern formed on a main surface of the base substrate, and an irregularity layer formed along the irregularity pattern”, “displacing the irradiation point in the irregularity layer by a galvano scanner displacing the irradiation point in the irregularity layer by a galvano scanner including a galvano mirror and a galvano motor, rotating the galvano mirror by the galvano motor so as to move the irradiation point within an area where the irradiation point of the galvano scanner is allowed to be formed; imaging the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam; and rotating the holder based on an outline of the imaged protrusion and removing the protrusion within each area of the substrate overlapping with the area, and then, switching the each area of the substrate by rotating the substrate.
Yoo teaches “an irregularity pattern formed on a main surface of the base substrate, and an irregularity layer formed along the irregularity pattern”. (Yoo teaches a laser process to planarize a silicon wafer with integrated circuits in column 1, lines 9-18 “Integrated circuits are formed by the deposition of many layers, each of which is shaped into a unique pattern before deposition of the next layer over it. As expected, once several such layers have been laid down, the topmost surface will have become significantly uneven and deposition of subsequent layers cannot be performed without the danger of unintended contact between layers occurring because of inadequate coverage. Thus, it is necessary to have a method for periodically planarizing the surface so that subsequent layers can be built up from a flat base.” Fig. 2 teaches that before planarization, wires 22 are fully covered by dielectric layer 24. Here wire pattern 22 is irregularity pattern, and layer 24 is irregularity layer.)
PNG
media_image6.png
272
558
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Yoo teaches forming irregularity layer on a Silicon substrate
rotating the holder….by rotating the substrate ( Yoo teaches placing the wafer on a rotatable table 31 in Fig. 3 during laser planarization.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the irregularity layer over the irregularity pattern on a wafer as taught in Yoo before planarizing the wafer by laser. It would also have been obvious to add the rotatable wafer table in Yoo to rotate the wafer in Xie. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “ dielectric layer 24 was deposited in sufficient quantity to ensure that wires 22 were fully covered. …. the next step would be to remove sufficient material so that the surfaces of layers ..24 became planar” as taught in column 2, line 62- column 3, line 1 in Yoo.)
Primary combination of references is silent about “displacing the irradiation point in the irregularity layer by a galvano scanner including a galvano mirror and a galvano motor, rotating the galvano mirror by the galvano motor so as to move the irradiation point within an area where the irradiation point of the galvano scanner is allowed to be formed; imaging the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam; and … based on an outline of the imaged protrusion and removing the protrusion within each area of the substrate overlapping with the area, and then, switching the each area of the substrate by …. the substrate”.
Nie teaches “displacing the irradiation point in the irregularity layer by a galvano scanner including a galvano mirror;” (Nie teaches in paragraph [25] “The laser beam delivery unit 130 may contain a Galvano scanner system 132 and a focusing optical system 134. The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
“imaging the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam;” (Nie teaches a method to measure topology using a surface profilometer and sending data to controller, controller determines ablation locations based on the data, and apply laser accordingly in Fig. 2, and Fig. 4.)
“and ….the holder based on an outline of the imaged protrusion” (Step 202 in Fig. 2 in Nie teaches measuring topology. Paragraph [37] teaches “the controller may determine a first position to planarize. The position may be a predetermined starting block of the panel, such as the upper left hand corner. The controller may move the laser to the first of the position(s) so determined using one or both of the laser beam delivery unit and the stage.”)
“ and removing the protrusion within each area of the substrate overlapping with the area,”( Nie teaches a method in Fig. 2 to measure topology using a surface profilometer and sending data to controller, controller determines ablation locations based on the data, and applies laser accordingly. Nie teaches in paragraph [25] “ The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
“and then, switching the area of the substrate by ….the substrate.” (Paragraph [43] of Nie teaches “The next block may be adjacent to the instant area or may be anywhere within the panel dependent on the topology of the panel. As above, the controller may then move the laser beam to the other block using one or both of the laser beam delivery unit and the stage. The laser beam may be used as above to planarize the new block as shown in FIG. 4C. This process may be repeated as shown in FIG. 4D.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to measure height and control the laser beam accordingly as taught in Nie to the laser assisted CMP method in Xie. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the laser beam may be controlled to move across the area to slice the dielectric material as shown in FIGS. 4B-4D, The optical surface profiler may be used during removal for in-situ monitoring and an instantaneous feedback to the controller to confirm that the calculated amount of dielectric material has been removed and thus control removal to sub-micron resolution” as taught in paragraph [39] of Nie.)
…so as to move the irradiation point within an area where the irradiation point of the galvano scanner is allowed to be formed; (Paragraph [25] in Nie teaches “The laser beam delivery unit 130 may contain a Galvano scanner system 132 and a focusing optical system 134. The Galvano scanner system may contain multiple galvanometer scan mirrors to direct the laser beam to any position in the field of view.”)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the camera, galvano scanner, and controller as taught in Nie to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “Topography of the layer is measured to produce a topographic map, which is then digitized into blocks of that indicate different thickness variation. Laser conditions are assigned for each block, a laser steered to planarization blocks where material is to be removed, and the material ablated at each planarization block. In-situ monitoring of the surface profile provides feedback to adjust the laser conditions during planarization” as taught in abstract in Nie.)
wherein the galvano scanner comprises …a galvano motor (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Small teaches “In a 2D galvo system, an X-Y scan head module including two mirrors each rotatable by a galvanometric motor is located along a laser beam path between a laser device and a work piece” in column 1, lines 30-35.)
rotating the galvano mirror by the galvano motor… (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Small teaches “In a 2D galvo system, an X-Y scan head module including two mirrors each rotatable by a galvanometric motor is located along a laser beam path between a laser device and a work piece” in column 1, lines 30-35.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the galvano motor as taught in Small to the laser wafer planarizing device in Su. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “The first galvanometric motor may operate to rotate its mirror to reposition the laser beam along the work piece with respect to a first axis (the X direction). The second galvanometric motor may operate to rotate its mirror to reposition the laser beam along the work piece with respect to a second orthogonal axis (the Y direction)” as taught in column 1, lines 35-40.
Regarding claim 14,
“The substrate processing method of Claim 13, further comprising: measuring a height of the irregularity layer before the protrusion is removed with the laser beam;”(Fig. 2 in Nie teaches measuring topology in step 202.)
“ and controlling an output of a light source of the laser beam based on a height of the protrusion, which is measured by the measuring of the height of the irregularity layer.” (Nie teaches a method to measure topology using a surface profilometer and sending data to controller, controller determines ablation locations based on the data, and apply laser accordingly in Fig. 2, and Fig. 4. Paragraph [44] teaches “A simplified surface of the panel is shown before and after planarization of each block of N blocks. As the heights are different, the laser conditions used may vary.”
PNG
media_image7.png
405
543
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4 of Nie teaches a laser planarization method
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to measure height and control the laser beam accordingly as taught in Nie to the laser assisted CMP method in Xie. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the laser beam may be controlled to move across the area to slice the dielectric material as shown in FIGS. 4B-4D, The optical surface profiler may be used during removal for in-situ monitoring and an instantaneous feedback to the controller to confirm that the calculated amount of dielectric material has been removed and thus control removal to sub-micron resolution” as taught in paragraph [39] of Nie.)
Regarding claim 20,
“The substrate processing method of Claim 13, further comprising: removing, before carrying the substrate into the polishing apparatus, debris produced on the irregularity layer in which the protrusion is removed to be flattened.” (The claim is interpreted as the substrate is cleaned before polishing.
Xie teaches on page 8, paragraph 10 “after irradiation the surface of gallium nitride crystal is cleaned by chemical solution”. Page 9, paragraph 3 teaches “after the laser irradiation, the method of the embodiment further comprises a plasma cleaning process on the surface of the gallium nitride crystal. then the gallium nitride crystal can be modifying the irradiation under the action of chemical corrosion and mechanical grinding and then polishing and flattening the surface.” Thus, Xie teaches cleaning the laser irradiated surface before polishing. It is implied that cleaning comprises removing debris produced during irradiation.)
Regarding claim 22,
“The substrate processing method of Claim 13, wherein the irregularity layer contains silicon oxide, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, silicon carbonitride, or carbon.” (Yoo teaches a laser planarization method in Fig. 2 wherein a dielectric layer is formed on the metal wires 22 to sufficiently cover the wire pattern. Column 3, lines 30-33 teaches “for structures such as FIG. 2, where dielectric material (such as silicon oxide, silicon nitride, or doped oxide) is to be removed”. It is understood that irregularity layer 24 contains silicon oxide or silicon nitride.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add silicon oxide as irregularity layer as taught in Yoo before planarizing the wafer by laser. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “ dielectric layer 24 was deposited in sufficient quantity to ensure that wires 22 were fully covered. …. the next step would be to remove sufficient material so that the surfaces of layers ..24 became planar” as taught in column 2, line 62- column 3, line 1 in Yoo.)
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie, Yoo, Nie, and Small as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Im.
“The substrate processing method of Claim 13, further comprising: uniforming an intensity distribution of the laser beam with a homogenizer;” (Primary combination of references is silent about claim 15.
Im teaches a beam homogenizer 144 in Fig. 1 in the optical path of the laser beam 164. It is inherent that a beam homogenizer uniforms intensity distribution of the laser beam.)
“and forming a cross-sectional shape of the laser beam into a rectangle shape by an aperture;” (Im teaches mask 150 with a rectangular open region 157 in Fig. 3. Column 8, lines 45-50 teaches “the mask 150 can pattern the pulsed beam to have a shape and profile directed by the open or transparent regions of the mask 150.” Here the open region 157 patterns the laser beam into a rectangular shape.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the steps of uniforming and forming a rectangle shaped laser beam as taught in Im in the laser assisted CMP method in Xie. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the open or transparent section 157 allows the portion of the beam pulse 164 whose cross-section corresponds to that of the section 157 to enter the optics of the system according to the present invention, and irradiate the corresponding areas of the semiconductor thin film 175. In this manner, the mask 150 is capable of pattering the beam pulse 164 so as to impinge the semiconductor thin film 175 of the sample 170 at predetermined portions thereof” as taught in column 8, lines 55-65. Additionally, designing the cross-section of laser beam into a rectangle shape is a result effective variable to optimize the laser processing, and hence obvious. MPEP 2144.05-II teaches“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) )
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie, Yoo, Nie, and Small as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Tabuchi et al., US 20180166282 (hereafter Tabuchi).
“The substrate processing method of Claim 20, wherein a water-soluble protective layer is formed on a surface of the irregularity layer opposite to the base substrate to protect the irregularity layer from the debris,” (Primary combination of references is silent about this limitation.
Tabuchi teaches in paragraph [7] “The wafer processing method includes a protective film forming step of supplying a water-soluble resin to a surface of the wafer and forming a protective film with which whole of the surface of the wafer is coated, a laser beam irradiation step of irradiating the wafer with a laser beam through the protective film along the streets to remove the functional layer and expose the substrate”. Thus, Tabuchi is solving the same problem of forming water-soluble protective layer as the instant claim.
Paragraph [54] teaches “adhesion of the debris to the front surface of the wafer W is prevented by the protective film 70 and quality lowering of the devices DV due to the adhesion of the debris can be prevented.”)
“ and the removing of the debris includes removing the water-soluble protective layer by dissolving the water-soluble protective layer in water.”(Tabuchi teaches in paragraph [58] “cleaning water is supplied from the water feed nozzle 22 toward the front surface of the wafer W and the protective film 70 left on the front surface of the wafer W is removed. Because being formed of the water-soluble resin, the protective film 70 can be easily washed away by the cleaning water. At this time, debris generated in the previous laser beam irradiation step is also washed away together with the protective film 70.”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the water-soluble layer and remove it after irradiation as taught in Tabuchi to the laser assisted CMP method in Xie. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “debris generated in the previous laser beam irradiation step is also washed away together with the protective film 70” as taught in paragraph [58] of Tabuchi.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 01/07/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5, 10, 12-15, 20-22 have been considered but are not persuasive.
The applicant amended claims 1 and 13 and argued that this makes the claimed invention distinguishable from prior art. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of prior art as discussed above.
The applicant argued on pages 9-12 that Nie does not teach rotation of the wafer. The examiner relies on Su to teach a rotatable wafer wherein the rotation is controlled by a controller. Nie teaches “Topography of the layer is measured to produce a topographic map, which is then digitized into blocks of that indicate different thickness variation. Laser conditions are assigned for each block, a laser steered to planarization blocks where material is to be removed, and the material ablated at each planarization block.”
Even though Nie is silent about rotating the wafer, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add Nie’s method of laser processing a specific area, then moving to the next area by rotating the stage as taught in Su. Nie’s method of laser processing area by area is applicable whether the wafer is moved through translational movement or rotational movement.
Applicant's arguments on page 12 against claim 13 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAHMIDA FERDOUSI whose telephone number is (303)297-4341. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-3:00PM; PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached on (571)270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FAHMIDA FERDOUSI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761